-''hct'e f.no.89-103/2017 appeal/14th...

R-'"' -~, HCT'E

F.No.89-103/2017 Appeal/14th Meeting-2017NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002

, Date: , 61' ~)'1ORDER ul

WHEREAS the appeal of Hazrat Nizamuddin Degree Collge, Baghrai, Patiyali, Etah,

Uttar Pradesh dated 18/02/2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-14365/261st

Meeting/2016/163832 dated. 27/12/2016 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing

recognition for conducting B.Ed. Cou~seon the grounds that "the reply dated 03.11.2016 of/

the applicant institution as well a/the order of the Hon'ble High Court date~ 20.10.2016

were considered by the NRC. The applicant institution has not yet submitted the list of the

faculty duly approved by the affl~ating university till date. The Hon'ble High Court has not

given any direction/order to thl NRC to extend the date for the compliance of the LOL"

AND WHEREAS Halt Nizamuddin Degree CoUge, Baghrai, Patiyali, Etah, Uttar

Pradesh was asked to prJsent the case of the appellant institution on 03/05/2017 but

nobody from the institution appeared. The Committee decided to give the appellant another

opportunity Le. the second opportunity to present their case.

AND WHEREAS Sh. Satyendra Kumar, Accountant, Hazrat Nizamuddin Degree

Collge, Baghrai, Patiyali, Etah, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution

on 21.08.2017 Le. the second opportunity granted to them. The appellant, in the appeal,

during presentation and in a letter dt. 21.08.2017 submitted that after getting the status of 7

(13) which was granted by the NRC on 02.05.2016, they applied on 10.05.2016 for getting

subject expert to conduct interview for appointing B.Ed. faculty. As the affiliating University

did not take any action on their request, they filed a Writ Petition No. 49545 of 2016 against

the University. The Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad in their order dt. 20.10.2016 directed

the University to consider the request of the petitioners. When the affiliating University did

not take any decision despite the order of the Hon'ble High Court, the institution filed a

Contempt Application No. 152 of 2017 against the University. In their letter dt. 21.08.2017,

the appellant submitted that the Hon'ble High Court passed orders on the Contempt

Application on 13.01.2017; the appellant issued a reminder to the Registrar of B.R.

Ambedkar University, and the Registrar issued a letter on 16.03.2017 about subject experts.

Thereafter the institution tried to conduct the interviews early but the subject expert did not

give time as they were busy with the examinations of the University. Finally, interviews were

conducted on 12.05.2017 and the subject experts report and other relevant documents were

submitted by the institution for getting approval from the University. After issuing a reminderl,

to the Registrar on 16.08.2017 and informing him about the hearing of the appeal by NCTE

on 21.08.2017, ~heRegistrar issuedthe approval letter of the B.Ed. faculty on 2.0.08.2017.I

The appellant forwarded copies of the correspondence referred to in their letter dt.

21.08.2017 inCI~ding a copy of the letter of the University dt. 20.08.2017 approving the

faculty.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that the appellant, in reply to the show causeI

notice, informed the NRC in their letter dt. 3.11.2016 about the steps taken by them to get the

faculty approve6, which included filing of a writ petition against the affiliating university onI

which orders were passed by the Hon'ble High Court on 20.10.2016. The Committee also

n~ted that the Jppellant in their letter dt. 21.8.2017 explained in detail the further steps taken

to get the facJlty finally approved on 20.8.2017. In these circumstances, the Committee

concluded that/the matter deserved to be remanded to the NRC with a direction to consider

the list of faculty approved and take further action as per the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The

appellant is dJected to forward the list of approved faculty and all the other documents .I

required in the Letter of Intent to the NRC within 15days of receipt of the orders on the appeal.

AND WlEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents

available on rdcords and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, theI

Committee COTcludedthat the appeal deserves to be remanded to NRC with a direction to

consider the list of faculty approved and take further action as per the NCTE Regulations,

2014. The ap~ellant is directed to forward the list of approved faculty and all the other

documents re~uired in the Letter of Intent to the NRC within 15 days of receipt of the orders

on the appead

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of HazratNizamuddin Degree College, Plot No. 1294, 1305, ViII- Baghrai Post- Badhola, Tehsil- Patiyali, Et~h, Uttar Pradesh - 207243 to the NRC, NCTE, for necessary action asindicated ab~ve.

a jay Awasthi)Member Secretary

1. The Manager, Hazrat Nizamuddin Degree College, Plot No. 1294, 1305, Viii -Baghr~iPost - Badhola, Tehsil - Patiyali, Etah, Uttar Pradesh - 207243.

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducat:ion & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Region'al Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1CBuildinb, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of UttarPrade~h, Lucknow.

RNCTE


HansBhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

Date:ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of Saket College of E~ucation, Sitapur, Datia, Madhya

Pradesh dated 14/02/2017 is against the Order No. WRC/1PP3017/223/263rd /2016/176588

dated 05/12/2016 of the Western Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting

B.Ed. Course on the grounds that Show Cause Notice was issued on 31/08/2016, and reply

was received on 04/10/2016. The institution has submitted all the required documents;

however, the institution has not replied to the Show Cause point regarding the composite

nature of the institution as required under Clause 2(b) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014.

Hence, Recognition is refused."

AND WHEREAS Saket College of Education, Sitapur, Datia, Madhya Pradesh was

asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 03/05/2017 but nobody from the

institution appeared. The Committee decided to give the appellant another opportunity Le.

the second opportunity to present their case.

AND WHEREAS Sh. Rajesh Shrivastava, Representative, Saket College of

Education, Sitapur, Datia, Madhya Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on

21.8.2017 Le. the second opportunity granted to them. The appellant in the appeal, during

personal presentation and in a letter dt. 19.8.2017 submitted that they have got affiliation

from Raja Man Singh Tomar Music and Fine Arts University, Gwalior to run various courses

under Saket Sangeet evam Kala Mahavidyalaya run by Prem Narayan Shiksha Prasar Evam

Paryavaran Samiti, which is the same college Le. Saket College of Education and now the

society is same, land is same and building is also same and so Saket College of Education

is now a composite institution. The appellant enclosed a copy of letter dt. 30.6.2017 issued

by Raja Man Singh Tomar Music and Arts University, Gwalior granting affiliation to Saket

Sangeet Evam Kala Mahavidyalaya, Datia for conducting B.A (Chitra Kala).

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that, despite the arguments advanced by the

appellant, Saket College of Education and Saket Sangeet Evam Kala Mahavidyalaya cannot

be treated as one and the same institution Le. composite institution as defined in clause 2(b)

of the NCTE Regulations, 2014, and the two institutions have separate identities. In these

circumstances, the Committee concluded that the WRC was justified in refusing recognition

and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the WRC confirmed.

iAND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the

Idocumer:1ts'available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the

hearing, the com~ittee concluded that the WRC was justified in refusing recognition and

therefore, the aptal de$erved to be rejected and the order of the WRC is confirmed.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appeI

I

1. The SecretarY, Saket College of Education, 598, 599, 608, Commercial, Sitapur,Datia, Madhya Pradesh - 475661

2. The Secretafy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Departme.nt of SchoolEducation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Di~ector,Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills,Bhopal - 462002.

4. The Secreta~, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of MadhyaIPradesh, BhtDpal.I



Date:ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of Adeshwar Institute of Educational Technology,

Khamargaon, Jagdalpur, Bastar, Chhattisgarh dated 13/02/2017 is against the Order No.

WRC/APP2639/B.Ed.l263rd/CG-2016/176881 dated 13/12/2016 of the Western Regional

Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed. Course on the grounds that an

examination of the file shows that the Society has submitted a lease deed in the name of

the Chairman ofthe Soceity. Private Lease deed is not permitted as per NCTE Regulations,

2014. The society has not submitted notarized copy of CLU, and Building Completion

Certificate issued by the competent authority. Further, the institution is not a composite one

which is not permitted under Clause 2(b) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014. In spite of multiple

opportunities given to the institution it has not removed the deficiencies. Hence,

Recognition is refused."

AND WHEREAS Adeshwar Institute of Educational Technology, Khamargaon,

Jagdalpur, Bastar, Chhattisgarh was asked to present the case of the appellant institution

on 03/05/2017 but nobody from the institution appeared. The Committee decided to give

the appellant another opportunity Le. the second opportunity to present their case.

AND WHEREAS Sh. Lalit, Director and Ms. Jibi George, C.E.O, Adeshwar Institute

of Educational Technology, Khamargaon, Jagdalpur, Bastar, Chhattisgarh presented the

case of the appellant institution on 21.08.2017 Le. the second opportunity granted to them.

The appellant, in the appeal and during personal presentation, submitted that they have

submitted a registered lease deed in Registrar's office and a notarised copy thereof and a

notarised copy of the certificate of land are enclosed. They had already submitted copies of

the CLU and building completion certificate issued by the competent authority and notarised

copies thereof are enclosed. The ground relating to composite institution was pointed out in

the show cause notice dt. 13.02.2016 for which a clarification was given stating that the

institution is running Four-year Bachelor of Nursing, which is an under graduate programme.

Presently the institution is running two year postgraduate programme in nursing along with

the undergraduate programme. '

I

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that the appellant submitted a 30 years lease

deed for the land which indicates that a private individual has leased the land to the

Chairman of Ad.eshwar Education Society. The Committee noted that according to the

provisions of Clause 8(4)(i) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014, the institution or society

sponsoring the institution should be in possession of the required land, free from all

encumbrances either on ownership basis or on lease from Government or Government

institutions for a period of not less than 30 years. Since, the land is on private lease, it is not

permissible und~r the provisions of the NCTE Regulations. Further, the building completion

certificate submitted by the appellant has been issued by a private architect and not by any

Govt. Engineer and it is not in the prescribed form. Further, Nursing course, which is a

professional course, cannot be taken as an undergraduate/postgraduate programme of

study in the fielq of liberal arts or humanities or social sciences etc as mentioned in Clause

2(b) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014 for the purpose of becoming a 'Composite' institution.

In these circum:stances, the Committee concluded that the WRC was justified in refusing

recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the WRC

confirmed.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the

documents ava'Hableon records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the

hearing, the Cqmmittee concluded that the WRC was justified in refusing recognition and

therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the WRC is confirmed.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order ap' aled against.

(Sanjay Awasthi)Member Secretary

1. The President, Adeshwar Institute of Educational Technology, 393, 0, 393,Khamargaon, Jagdalpur, 8astar, Chhattisgarh - 4940012.

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department .of SchoolEducation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Western Regional Committee, Manas Bhawan, Shayamala Hills,Bhopal - 462002.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Chhattisgarh.

R.HCTE


Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

Date:ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of Mohan College of Teachers Education, Meerut, Uttar

Pradesh dated 17/02/2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-9088/261st

Meeting/2016/163722 dated 27/12/2016 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing

recognition for conducting B.Ed. Course on the grounds that "the institution has not

submitted the reply of show cause notice dated 17.10.2016 issued by the NRC, NCTE in

stipulated time period."

AND WHEREAS Mohan College of Teachers Education, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh was

asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 04/05/2017 but nobody appeared

before Appeal Committee. It was submitted in the Appeal memoranda that "Appeal under

Section 18 of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 against decision taken

by NRC in its 261st Meeting whereby NRC decided to reject applicant filed by appellant

seeking recognition/permission to run B.Ed. (Add!. Intake) Course in exercise of powers

contained in Section 14(3)(b) of NCTE Act, 1993".

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee decided to grant another (second) opportunity

to appellant to make personal presentation of the case before the Committee.

AND WHEREAS Dr. N. K. Sinha, Director and Sh. Subhash Chand, Treasurer, Mohan

College of Teachers Education, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant

institution on 21.08.2017 i.e. the second opportunity granted to them. The appellant, in the

appeal and during personal presentation, submitted that the show cause notice dt. 17.10.2016

mentioned in the refusal order dt. 27.12.2016 has not been issued to them. The appellant also

submitted that they had submitted a reply along with supporting documents in the NRC office

on 13.06.2016. The appellant enclosed a copy of their letter dt. 11.06.2016, which bears the

receipt stamp of NRC dt. 13.06.2016.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted from the file of the NRC that after receipt of a

reply on 28.10.2015 to the Letter of Intent issued on 6.3.2014 (as per the decision taken by

the NRC in their 225th Meeting held from 25th February to 1st March, 2014) they issued a show

cause notice dt. 2.12.2015 to the appellant asking him to submit proof that the institution is a

composite institution accompanied by an affidavit within 30 days. While no reply to this letter

appears to have, been received, the NRC in their 2615t meeting held from 14th to 19th

December, 2016 aecided to refuse recognition on the ground that the institution did not submit

a reply to the shdw cause notice dt.17.10.2016 and issued the refusal order on 27.12.2016.

The Committee ~oted that the file does not contain any show cause notice dt. 17.10.2016.

The Committee aliso noted from the copy of the reply dt. 11.6.2016 sent by the appellant and

which was recei+d in NRC on 13.6.2016, that it was in response to the revised recognition

order dt. 5.6.201$. In this letter the appellant made submission about composite nature of their

institution.

AND WHEREAS the Committee in the above circumstances concluded that the matter

deserved to be rbmanded to the NRC with a direction to re-issue their show cause notice dt.

17.10.201~ to t~e appellant and also seek their reply to the earlier letter dt. 2.12.2015 and

take further actidn as per the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The appellant is also directed to send

a copy of their IJtter dt. 11.6.2016 with its enclosures to the NRC within 15 days of receipt of

the order on the appeal.

AND WIifEREASafter perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents

available on redords and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the

Committee condluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to NRC with a direction to re-

issue their shoJ cause notice dt. 17.10.2016 to the appellant and also seek their reply to the

earlier letter dt./2.12.2015 and take further action as per the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The

appellant is als~ directed to send a copy of their letter dt. 11.6.2016 with its enclosures to the

NRC within 15 bays of receipt of the order on the appeal.

,I 'I

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Mohan Collegeof Teachers E~ucation, 298, Educational Purpose, 298, Saral, Meeru , Uttar Pradesh -

I250251 to the ~RC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.


1. The Mana~er, Mohan College of Teachers Education, 298, Educational Purpose, 298,Saral, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh - 250251

2. The Secr~tary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation ~ Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1CBuilding, ~hawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh,Lucknow. I

ORDER

'R,I-~~

F.No.89-250/E-1899/2017 Appeal/14th Meeting-2017NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

Hans Bhawan, Wing 1.1, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002

Date: ,b',9r,WHEREAS the appeal of M.R.S. Shri Krishna Pranami Girls PG College, Bhadra,

Nohar Road, Bhadra, Rajasthan dated 26.04.2017 is against the decision of the Northern

Regional Committee taken in their 265th meeting held from 27th February to 3rd March, 2017

to refuse recognition for conducting BA B.Ed./B.Sc. B.Ed. course on the grounds that "1.

No objection certificate issued by the concerned affiliating body for the proposed course is

not submitted. 2. The institution has still not submitted the certified registered land

documents issued by the registering authority or civil authority concerned. 3. The Govt.

lease is in the name of the President of the Society instead of the Society/Institution. 4. The

building plan approved by the PWD does not contain the name of the proposed course, size

of the MPH and total land area. 5. The institution has still not submitted the LUC (Land Use

Certificate) issued by the Competent Authority to use the land for Educational purpose. 6.

The institute has still not submitted the Non-Encumbrance Certificate issued by the

competent authority indicating that land is free from all encumbrances. Hence, the

Committee decided that the application is rejected and recognition / permission is refused."

The file does not contain a copy of the formal order issued refusing recognition.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that appellant filed a S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No. 5613/2017 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench

against the belated communicat:ion of the order of refusal on 20.04.2017 with a request for

consideration of their case. The Hon'ble High Court, in their order dt. 24.04.2017, finding no

case for exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Court, directed the petitioner to avail

the remedy of appeal against the impugned rejection of its application for recognition of its

4-year B.A.B. ED; B.Sc. B.S.Ed. integrated course. In view of the fact that the last date for

grant of recognition to teacher training courses by NCTE had been fixed by the Apex Court

as 02.05.2017, the Hon'ble Court, in their order directed the Appellate Authority that, in the

event of an appeal being filed by the petitioner institution, the same may be decided by a

reasoned and speaking order expeditiously. The appellant with his on-line appeal dt.

26.04.2017 has not enclosed a copy of the refusal order dt. 24.04.2017.

AND WHEREAS M.R.S. Shri Krishna Pranami Girls PG College, Bhadra, Nohar

Road, Bhadra, Rajasthan was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on

30/05/2017 but nobody appeared. In the appeal, it is submitted that "No objection certificate

of the affiliating IbOdYwas submitted along with the reply to the show cause notice. The

Government lease was granted in favour of the society and the president of the society only

exe,cuted' toe le~se deed in favour of the society. Certified copy of the registered land

documents and building plan approved by the concerned authority containing the particulars

of multipurpose Ihall was also submitted to the Regional Committee along with the reply of

the Show Cause Notice. The land area required for establishment of the four-yearI

integrated BA ~.Ed. B.Sc. B.Ed. is less than I acre and as per the circular 06/10/2016 of

the State Gove1nment less than I acre agriculture land is not required to be changed into

institutional lana. However, the institution has already submitted application with theI

concerned auth6rity for change of land use and submitted the required fee also. The non-

encumbrance cbrtificate was submitted along with the reply to the show cause notice with

the Regional CJmmittee."II

I. AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution preferred appeal

against the imp~gned minutes but did not appear before Appeal Committee on 30.05.2017

as per notice diven to him. As per extant appeal rules, upto three adjournments can be

allowed to an Jppellant to appear before the Committee for making personal presentation

of the case. AP~eal Committee, therefore, decided to grant another (second) opportunity to

the appellant tcl appear before the Committee for making personal presentation.I

AND W~EREAS Dr. Pawan Venna, Principal and Dr. Veer Singh, Vice Principal,I .

M.R.S. Shri Krishna Pranami Girls PG College, Bhadra, Nohar Road, Bhadra, RajasthanI

presented the Icase of the appellant institution on 21.08.2017 i.e. the second opportunity

granted to therh. In the course of hearing the appellant submitted copies of the No Objection

Certificates dtJ 28.05.2016 issued by the Registrar, Maharaja Ganga Singh University,

Bikaner, a co~y of Non-encumbrance certificate dt. 21.03.2017 issued by the Deputy

Registrar, Bha~ra, a copy the Land Use Certificate dt. 11.04.2017 issued by Nagarpalika,

Bhadra (Hanu~angarh); and a copy of the building plan indicating the name of the cours~.

II

AND W,HEREAS the Committee noted that the appellant in their appeal letter dt.

26.4.2017 has!given replies to the various points raised in the minutes of the NRC meetingI

held on 21.1.2017, wherein a decision was taken to issue a show cause notice and also

enclosed COPi~Sof v~rious documents mentioned in para 6 above. In these circumstance,

the Committe~ concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the NRC with a

direction to c~nsider once again the submissions of the appellant and the documents

submitted by them and take further action as per the provisions of the NCTE Regulations,I

2014. The a~pellant is directed to furnish the .information contained in their letter dt.I

26.4.2017 with all supporting documents to the NRC within 15 days of receipt of the orderson the appeal.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents

available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the

Committee concluded that the ~appealdeserves to be remanded to NRC with a direction to

consider once again the submissions of the appellant and the documents submitted by them

and take further action as per the provisions of the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The appellantis directed to furnish the information contained in their letter dt. 26.4.2017 with all supporting

I

documents to the NRC within 15 days of receipt of the orders on the appeal.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of M.R.S. ShriKrishna Pranami Girls PG College, Bhadra, Nohar Road, Bhadra, Raj than to theNRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.


1. The Principal, M.R.S. Shri Krishna Pranami Girls PG College, Bhadra, Nohar Road,Bhadra - 335501, Rajasthan

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1CBuilding, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Uttar Pradesh,Lucknow.

ORDER

RMeTE


Hans Shawan, Wing II, 1, Sahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

Date: 16h\Sfl"WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Sadri Prasad Mahavidyalaya, Arifpur, Mandanpur,

Sagari, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh dated 16/02/2017 is against the Order No.

NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-14960/261 st Meeting/2016/163620 dated 23/12/2016 of the Northern

Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.EI.Ed. Course on the grounds

that "in the online application submitted by the institution, Khasra No. of the land has been

mentioned as 196, whereas registered land documents submitted by the institution reveal

Khasra No. as 108 and the CLU has been issued for Khasra No. 396."

AND WHEREAS Shri Vijayshankar Yadav, Manager and Rramashry, Clerk, Shri

Sadri Prasad Mahavidyalaya, Arifpur, Mandanpur, Sagari, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh

presented the case of the appellant institution on 04/05/2017. In the appeal and during

personal presentation it was submitted that "All the documents as mentioned in the 258th

meeting have been deposited in person on 15/11/2016. The ownership rights of khasra no.

196, 108gh, 108n have been mutated in the name of Shri Sadari Prasad Mahavidyalaya.

According to regulation 2014 land is sufficient. The documents demanded by NRC Jaipur

have been submitted according to regulation 2014. All the documents submitted by me are

genuine."

AND WHEREAS appellant during the course of appeal presentation on 04.05.2017

submitted a written request for grant of another opportunity to bring land related documents .

.Appeal rules permit upto three adjournments sought by appellant. Appeal Committee,

therefore, decided to grant another opportunity.

AND WHEREAS Sh. Vijay Shankar Yadav, Representative, Shri Sadri Prasad

Mahavidyalaya, Arifpur, Mandanpur, Sagari, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh presented the case

of the appellant institution on 21.08.2017 Le. the second opportunity granted to them. In the

course of personal presentation, the appellant submitted a letter dt. 21.08.2017 and

enclosed copies of certain land related documents. These include a copy of the CLU dt.

22.01.2015 in respect of 0.269 hect in Khasra No. 196 in addition to another CLU in respect

of 1.80 AR in Khasra NO.108 and mutation documents in respect of land in Khasra No. 196

and 108 in the name of Sadri Prasad Mahavidyalaya.


AND WHEREAS the Committee, noting that the submission/clarifications furnished

by the appellant ~re satisfactory, concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the

NRC with a direction to consider the various documents submitted by the appellant and take

further action asper the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The appellant is directed to forward to

the NRC, all the ;Iand related documents submitted in appeal, within 15 days of receipt of,the orders on thE1appeal.

AND WH~REAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents

available on recQrds and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the,Committee concluded that the appeal deserves to be remanded to NRC with a direction to

consider the various documents submitted by the appellant and take further action as per

the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The appellant is directed to forward to the NRC, all the land

related documen~ssubmitted in appeal, within 15 days of receipt of the orders on the appeal.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of Shri SadriPrasad Mahavidyalaya, Plot No. 196, 108GH, 108N, Village'- Arifpur, P.O.-Mandan pur,Tehsil - Sagari, District - Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh to the NRC, NCT for necessaryaction as indicated above. ~

I.1. The Manager!, Shri Sadri Prasad Mahavidyalaya, Plot No. 196, 108GH, 108N, Village

- Arifpur, P.O.-Mandanpur, Tehsil - Sagari, District - Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh -276124




ORDER

RNCTE


Hans Bhawan, Wing 11,1,Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi -110002

.Date: 1 b.', ~\ JWHEREAS the appeal of Kalindi College of Education Baraut, Bagpat, Uttar Pradesh

dated 20/02/2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-4631/256th Meeting (Part-

2)/2016/158679 dated 23/09/2016 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing

recognition for conducting B.Ed.lM.Ed. Course on the grounds that "the Institution was given

show cause notice vide letter dt. 22.09.2015 with direction to submit the reply within 30

days. The institution did not submit any reply of show cause notice."

AND WHEREAS Kalindi College of Education Baraut, Bagpat, Uttar Pradesh was

asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 04/05/2017 but nobody appeared.

In the appeal memoranda it is submitted that "due to late approval of teaching faculty". As

per extant appe.al rules, an appellant is entitled to seek upto three adjournments. As the

appellant did not app~ar before the Appeal Committee on 4.5.2017, Committee decided to

grant another (second) opportunity to the appellant to make their personal presentation.

AND WHEREAS Dr. Y. S. Tomar, Treasurer, Kalindi College of Education Baraut,

Bagpat, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21.08.2017 Le. the

second opportunity granted to them. In the course of presentation, the appellant submitted

a copy of their letter dt. 05.11.2015, sent to the NRC as a reply to their show cause notice

dt. 22.09.2015. Their letter bears the receipt stamp of the NRC no. 147023 dt. 05.11.2015.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that the NRC issued a Letter of Intent (Lol) to

the appellant institution on 26.3.2015 with a direction to fulfil the requirements mentioned

therein within two months of its issue. As no reply was received within the prescribed time,

NRC issued a show cause notice on 22.9.2015, which was to be replied within 30 days of

its issue. The NRC in their 256th meeting held from 22nd to 25th August, 2016 decided to

refuse recognition on the ground that the institution was given show cause notice vide letter

dt. 22.9.2015 with direction to submit the reply within 30 days and the institution did not

submit any reply of show cause notice and issued the refusal order on 23.9.2016.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted from the documents submitted by the

appellant that he sent a reply to the show cause notice on 5.11.2015, which was received

in the NRC, but the original of that reply is not found in the file. The Committee noted from

a copy of that reply that the appellant furnished replies to various points and requested that

their application may not be processed and some time may be given to them and also stated

that very, soon staff will be appointed and information sent. The Committee further noted

that after issue of the refusal order, the appellant sent an undated letter to the NRC, which

was received on 18.11.2016 and placed in the file. With this letter the appellant enclosed

various documents required as per the Letter of Intent including a letter dt. 11.11.2016 from

Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut approving the faculty.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noting that the appellant sent a reply to the show

cause notice an~ furnished the documents required in the Letter of Intent shortly after the

refusal order, concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the NRC with a

direction to cons'ider the appellant's reply received on 18.11.2016 and take further action as

per NCTE Reguilations, 2014. The appellant is directed to forward a copy of their letter dt.

5.11.2015 with all its enclosures to NRC within 15 days of receipt of order on the appeal.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents

available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the

Committee conqludedthat the appeal deserves to be remanded to NRC with a direction to

consider the appellant's reply received on 18.11.2016 and take further action as per NCTE

Regulations, 2014. The appellant is directed to forward a copy of their letter dt. 5.11.2015with all its enclo~ures to NRC within 15 days of receipt of order on the appeal.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of KalindiCollege of Education, Plot No. 820, Baraut, Bagpat, Uttar prade~st. th.eNRC, NCTE,for necessary action as indicated above.

,

, (Sanjay Awasthi)Member Secretary

1. The Appellant, Kalindi College of Education, Plot No. 820, Baraut, Bagpat, UttarPradesh - 250611




~:t .~-.n-


Hans Bhawan, Wing U, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of Jokhan Mahavidhalaya, Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh dated

28/02/2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-

2913/261s'lMeeting/2016/164187 dated 30/12/2016 of the Northern Regional Committee,

withdrawing recognition for conducting B.Ed. Course on the grounds that "The institution

submitted lists of faculty dt. 16.03.2015 claimed to have been approved by the affiliating

university on the basis of which it was granted recognition by NCTE to run the B.Ed. course.

The affiliating university i.e. Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University, Jaunpur made a

complaint vide its letter dated 28.07.2016 received in NRC office on 07.08.2016 against

some institutions including the present one that the list of faculty claimed to have been

approved by the affiliating university on 16.03.2015 has not been issued by the university

and the university approved the list only on 01.04.2016. The institution has thus submitted

a fake list of faculty for seeking grant of recognition. The list of faculty dt. 01.04.2016

submitted by the institution vide its letter received' in NRC office on 28.10.2016 in response

to SCN dt. 17.09.2016 cannot be accepted now since institution was granted recognition for

B.Ed. course by NRC on 09.04.2015 for which institution submitted the fake list of faculty."

AND WHEREAS Jokhan Mahavidhalaya Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh was asked to

present the case of appellant institution on 04/05/2017 but nobody appeared. As per extant

appeal rules, an appellant can seek upto three adjournments for making personal

presentation of the case before Appeal Committee. Appeal Committee, therefore, decided

to grant another (second) opportunity to appellant institution to appear before the Appeal

Committee for making oral and personal presentation of the case.

AND WHEREAS Sh. Kanhaya Singh Yadav, Member, Jokhan Mahavidhalaya

Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on 21.08.2017 Le.

the second opportunity granted to them. In the appeal Memoranda, it is submitted that "the

recognition has been erroneously and wrongly withdrawn as the Registrar committed an

error in informing that the recognition was obtained on fake faculty list and the Registrar

corrected the error committed by their office. Hence withdrawal of recognition is

unwarranted and recognition erroneously withdrawn.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that the NRC issued the Letter of Intent (Lol)

to the appellant ihstitution on 22.1.2015. The institution submitted a reply dated Nil receivedI

in the NRC on 19.3.2015, enclosing a number of documents, which included copies of two

letters dt. 16.3.J015 issued by the Registrar, Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University,

Jaunpur approvi'ng the names of one HOD and seven lecturers for B.Ed. course in theII

appellant institut,ion. The NRC, after considering the matter in their 234th meeting held on

30-31 March an~ 1st April, 2015, issued recognition order on 9.4.2015 for an intake of 100I

(two units) from the academic session 2015-16.

IAND WHEREAS the Committee noted that the Registrar, Veer Bahadur Sing

I

Purvanchal uni~ersity, Jaunpur wrote a letter dt. 28.7.2016 to the Regional Director, NRC

enclosing a list G>finstitutions which were granted recognition and mentioning the dates of

issue of Letter J Intent, approval of the faculty by the University and order of recognition.

In that letter the IRegistrar requested the NRC to verify the correctness of these documents

and take necessary action. In respect of the appellant the dates of issue of Lol, approval of

faculty and reColgnitionorder have been mentioned as 22.1.2015, 1.4.2016 and 9.4.2015

respectively. NR!c. finding that while recognition order was issued on 9.4.2015 on the basisI

of the approval cJ>fthe faculty by the university on 16.3.2015, as intimated by the appellant,

the university in itheir letter dt. 28.7.2016 intimated that the date of their approval of faculty

was 1.4.2016, i~ their 256th meeting held from 22nd to 25th August, 2016 decided to issue a,show cause notice to the appellant. The show cause notice was issued on 7.9.2016. The

I

appellant, in their reply dt. 28.10.2016 stated that as the earlier approved staff did not join,I

they had to selJct new faculty members and get them approved. The appellant with that

letter enclosed J copy of the university's letter dt. 16.3.2015 approving the name of the HoD

and a copy of ahother letter of the university dt. 1.4.2016 approving seven lecturers. The

appellant encloJed an affidavit stating the circumstances leading to the cancellation of the

earlier apPointmlents and selection/approval of new faculty.III

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted from the file that the NRC did not seek

verification of th~ authenticity of the university's earlier letters dt. 16.3.2015 and the letter

dt. 1.4.2016 en~losed to the appellant's letter dt. 28.10.2016. As the appellant has givenI

reasons for appbinting new staff approved by the university, the Committee concluded thatI

the matter dese~rvedto be remanded to the NRC with a direction to get all the approvals

intimated by thelappellant verified by the university and take further action as per the NCTE

Regulations, 20r4. In the meantime, the order of withdrawal, shall be kept in abeyance.

1AND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, documents

!available on recbrds and considering the oral arguments advanced during the hearing, the

Committee concluded that the ,appeal deserves to be remanded to NRC with a direction to

get all the approvals intimated by the appellant verified by the university and take further

action as per the NCTE Regulations, 2014. In the meantime, the order of withdrawal, shall

be kept in abeyance.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of JokhanMahavidhyalaya, Plot - 712; 751, Village - Ekara, PO-Gaura, Taluk-Saidpur City -Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh to the NRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indo ated above.

1. The Manager, Jokhan Mahavidhyalaya, Plot - 712,751, Village - Ekara, PO-Gaura,Taluk-Saidpur City - Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh - 233307




~.....,...... .....HeTE

F.No.89-173/2017 Appeal/14lh Meeting-2017NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION


ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of Patel Co-Education TT College New Gharsana,

Ganganagar, Rajasthan dated 28/02/2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-

11052/26151 Meeting/2016/165173 dated 11/01/2017 of the Northern Regional Committee,

refusing recognition for conducting B.A B.Ed.!B.Sc. B.Ed. course on the grounds that

"Reply dated 27.07.2016 submitted by the institution in response to show cause notice

dated 16.08.2016 clearly proves that the institution is not offering under graduate or post

graduate programme of studies in the field of Liberal Arts or Humanities or Social Science

or Science or Mathematise for grant of recognition for four year integrated programme of

B.AB.Ed.! B.Sc.B.Ed. as required by clause 2(b) of NCTE Regulations, 2014 and clause

1.1 of Appendix-13 (Norms and Standards for B.AB.Ed.! B.Sc.B.Ed.)."

AND WHEREAS Patel Co-Education TT College New Gharsana, Rajasthan was

asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 05/05/2017 but nobody appeared.

As per extant appeal rules, upto three adjournments can be allowed to an appellant for

making personal presentation of the appeal case. Appeal Committee, therefore, decided

to grant second (2nd) opportunity to the appellant for making personal presentation of the

case.

AND WHEREAS Dr. N.Kumar, Representative, Patel Co-Education TT College Ne,«

Gharsana, Ganganagar, Rajasthan presented the case of the appellant institution on

21.08.2017 Le. the second opportunity granted to them. In the appeal, during personal

presentation and in a letter dt. 21.08.2017, the appellant submitted that (i) the NRC granted

recognition for B.Ed. course vide order No. F.No.!NRC/NCTE/RJ-1393/208/58868 Dt.

25.08.2008; (ii) the NRC had sought consent from various recognised institutions to come

under Regulations, 2014. Accordingly, their institution had also submitted its willingness by

means of affidavit and consequently revised recognition order dated F.NO.!NRC/NCTE/RJ-

1393/2015/96352 Dt. 20.04.2015 was issued to their institution; (iii) Clause 8 of NCTE

Regulations, 2014 provides that New Teacher Education Institutions shall be located in

composite institutions and the existing teacher education institutions shall continue to

function as stand-alone institutions, and gradually move towards becoming composite

institution; (iv) in order to comply with these provisions they applied for the course under

consideration; (v) their application was duly considered by NRC in accordance with the NRC

Act, 1993 and Regulations, 2014 and upon finding the documents etc. to be in order,

inspection was caused by the visiting team; (vi) thereafter, NRC decided to issue letter of

intent (LOI)as cdntained under Regulation 7(13) of the Regulation, 2014 prior to issuance

of formal order o~recognition; (vii) they submitted certain documents sought by NRC which

comprised of copies of FOR of Endowment Fund and Reserve Fund in joint account of RD,

NRC, NCTE and Society, downloaded copies of website of the institution with hyperlinks as

per Regulations, 7(14), list of faculty duly approved by affiliating body etc; (viii) the case of

their institution was reconsidered by NRC in its 254th meeting held from 28th to 30th June,

2016 wherein NRC took a decision to issue show cause notice to their institution mentioning

that "the applicant institution has not submitted any proof/ evidence that it is offering under

graduate or post graduate programme of studies in the field of Liberal Arts or Humanities or

Social Science or Science or Mathematics for getting grant of recognition for 4 years

integrated programme leading to B.Sc. B.Ed.! BA B.Ed. degree as has been mentioned in

clause 2(b) of NCTE Regulations, 2014 and clause 1.1 of the Appendix 13 (Norms and

Standards for B.Sc. B.Ed.! B.A. B.Ed. degree"; (ix) as per clause 8 of the 2014 Regulations,

their institution which is an existing institution, shall gradually move towards becoming

composite institution; (x) the Regulations have defined institutions offering more than one

teacher education programme also as composite institutions and therefore, an institution

offering two or three teacher education programmes need not take any further action in the

matter, however, an institution shall have to seek recognition for one more programme if

currently it is off~ring only one programme; (xi) Regulation 7(13) does not contain any

stipulation with regard to provision of proof/evidence of composite institutions; (xii) the B.Ed.

programme being run is also a degree programme and the faculty involved in teaching

would be considered as extended faculty; (xiii) the SCN has been issued at a very belated

stage and the principle of promissory estoppel would operate in their case as a decision to

issue LOI has already been taken; and (xiv) the appellant has reliably learnt that other

Regional Committees have considered and processed applications from institutions which

were stand alone like the appellant without requirement of undergraduate programmes.

AND WHEREAS the appellant, in their letter dated 21.08.2017, has drawn attention

to the Council's letter dated 10.2.2017 in which it has been stated that the 4 year integrated

teacher education programme can also be given to a teacher education institution offering

a single teacher education programme, provided the affiliating university agrees to regulate

the BA/B.Sc. component of the integrated programme, as per university norms. The

appellant also submitted that the Hon'ble High Court for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur in their

order dt. 17.04.2017 in S.B. Civil Writ petition NO. 14247/2016 filed by Ambika Teacher

Training COllege; Jodhpur, directed the NRC to dispose of the representation of the

petitioner in the c~:>ntextof NCTE's letter dt. 10.02.2017. The appellant also enclosed a copy

,"

of the Council's appellate order dt. 05.07.2016, wherein the NRC was directed to process

the application of Guru Nanak Dev College of Education, Chandigarh for B.A. B.Ed.! B.Sc.

B.Ed. course as that college was running other teacher training programmes.

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that according to the provisions of para 1.1 of

the Norms and Standards for 4-year Integrated programme leading to B.Sc. B.Ed.! B.A.

B.Ed. degree, contained in Appendix-13 to the NCTE Regulations, 2014, this programme

aims at integrating general studies comprising science (B.Sc. B.Ed.) and social sciences or

humanities (B.A., B.Ed.) and professional studies comprising foundations of education,

pedagogy of school subjects and practicum related to the tasks and functions of a school

teacher. In the light of these provisions, availability of BA! B.Sc. courses in an institution

intending of offer the integrated B.A. B.Ed.! B.Sc. B.Ed. programmes, can only fulfil the

objectives of the integrated programme. The Committee also noted that keeping this in view,

the NCTE in their letter dt. 07.04.2016 addressed to the Regional Committees laid down

that (i) the application for a 4-year integrated programme can be processed, if the applicant

has simultaneously applied to the affiliating body for a graduate programme, and (ii) the

affiliating body has undertaken to regulate the B.A.!B.Sc. component of the integrated

programme, in accordance with the curriculum and norms of the University. The latterII

condition has been re-iterated in the NCTE's letter dt. 10.02.2017.l,

AND WHEREAS the Committee, not-withstanding a different view taken in some

cases earlier, is of well-considered opinion that the applications for introduction of integrated

4 year BA B.Ed.! B.Sc. B.Ed. should satisfy the requirements mentioned in para 5 above

for fulfilling the objectives of th~ integrated programme, clearly laid down in the preamble of

the Norms and Standards for this course. The B.Ed. programme being conducted by the

appellant institution, can, under no, circumstances, be considered as an undergraduate

programme of study in the field of liberal arts or humanities etc. mentioned in clause 2 (b)

of the NCTE Regulations, 2014. In the above circumstances the Committee concluded that,

as the appellant has not fulfilled the required conditions mentioned in para 5 above, the

NRC was justified in refusing recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected

and the order of the NRC confirmed.


documents available on records and considering the oral arguments advanced during the

hearing, the Committee concluded that the NRC was justified in refusing recognition and

therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the NRC is confirmed.I

r~.

-'--\-

INOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appe

I

I ;--II Member Secretary

1. The APpeilanit, Patel Co Education T.T. College, New Gharsana, 64/47, Ownership,I 'STR, Gharsana, Ganganagar, Rajasthan - 335711

2. The SecretarY, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & Literacy,' Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Direbtor, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-'II, L1CBuilding, BhaJ,ani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan. '

4. The Secreta~, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Rajasthan,Jaipur. I '

III

II,

II

o I

Ii1

iIIIi

I ~I. \7C~ •••.•F.No.89-174/2017Appeal/14th Meeting-2017

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATIONHans Bhawan,Wing ii, 1, BahadurshahZafar Marg,New Delhi-110002

II, Date: lb l,~\ '}

ORDER,

WHEREAS the appeal of Mascot College of Education, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh

dated 28.02.2017 is against the Order No. NCTE/NRC/NRCAPP-201615316/ dated

11/02/2017 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting

B.EI.Ed. course on the grounds that "Certified registered land documents have not

been submitted. Photocopy of the registered land documents are not acceptable as

per the provision of the NCTE regulations, 2014. Hence, the Committee decided

that the application is rejected and recognition/ permission is refused u/s 14/15 (3)

(b) of the NCTE Act, 1993. FDRs, if any, be returned to the institution."

AND WHEREAS Mascot College of Education, Uttar Pradesh was asked to

present the case of the appellant institution on 05/05/2017 but nobody appeared.

As per extant appeal rules, upto three adjournments can be allowed to an appellant

for making personal presentation of the appeal case. Appeal Committee decided

to grant second opportunity to the appellant for making personal presentation of the

case.

AND WHEREAS Sh. Nikhil Arora, Administrator and Dr. Jai Karan Mathur,

H.O.D, Mascot College ot' Education, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the

appellant institution on 21.08.2017 Le. the second opportunity granted to them. In

the appeal memoranda it is submitted that they have received a show cause notice

from the concerned department showing the deficiency in the copy of the land

documents. They have submitted the copy of land documents whereas certified

copy of land documents was required due to which their file was rejected by the

department. The appellant along with the appeal submitted certified copies of the

registered land documents.;

. !AND WHEREAS thel Committee, noting that the appellant has got certified

copies of the registered Iland documents which were required by the NRC,I

concluded that the matter deserved to be remanded to the NRC with a direction to


consider the do~uments, to be submitted to them by the appellant, and take further

action as per thle NCTE Regulations, 2014. The appellant is directed to submit the\

certified copies! of the registered land documents to the NRC within 15 days ofI

receipt of the o~ders on the appeal.

I

i

AND WH1EREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit,I

documents ava1ilable on records and considering the oral arguments advancedI

during the heahng, the Committee concluded that the appeal deserves to beII .

remanded to NRC with a direction to consider the documents, to be submitted to

them by the ap~ellant, and take further action as per the NCTE Regulations, 2014.I

The appellant IS directed to submit the certified copies of the registered land

documents to t~e NRC within 15 days of receipt of the orders on the appeal.I,iI . . .

NOW THf¥:REFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of MascotCollege of EdU:cation, 16th K.M. Milestone Pilibhit Road, Rithora, Bareilly, UttarPradesh to thei NRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated ove.

IIIII

1. The Appella~t, Mascot College of Education, 16th K.M. Milestone PilibhitRoad, Ritho~a, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh - 243122

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & l1.iteracy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Dir~ctor, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II,L1C Building, ~hawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The SecretarY, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of UttarPradesh, Lucknow. :

IIIIIIII

I,!III

!iII

i,

ORDER

.8F.No.89-175/2017 Appeal/14th Meeting-2017

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATIONHans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

Date: Ib1\ ~\ 'I

WHEREAS the appeal of Government Sanskrit College, Patna, Bihar

dated 27/02/2017 is against the Order No.

ERC/227. 9.24/8852/B. Ed .IERCAPP201645065/20 16/51358 dated 16/02/2017 of

the Eastern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for cor:-tducting B.Ed. course

on the grounds that "a. Show Cause Notice was issued on 07.11.2016 on the

following grounds: i) The ~pplicant submitted demand draft of Rs. 150000/ as

processing fee. As per he online NCTE portal, payment through online only is

accepted. ii) the applicant mentioned in the online application that the type of

management is Govt. aided. Proof of Govt. aided institution is not submitted. b. in

response to SCN, the institution submitted its reply dated 23.11.2016 with a proof of

Govt. aided institution. The ERC considered the reply of the institution and found

that the institution is still deficient on the following grounds. i) the applicant submitted

demand draft of Rs. 150000/- as processing Fee. As per the online NCTE portal,

payment through online only is accepted In view the above the Committee

decided as under: The Committee is of the opinion that application bearing code

no. ERCAPP 201645065 of the institution regarding recognition of B.Ed. programme

is refused under section 14(3) (b) of NCTE Act, 1993."

AND WHEREAS Government Sanskrit College, Bihar was asked to present the

case of the appellant institution on 05/05/2017 but nobody appeared. As per extant

appeal rules, upto three adjournment can be allowed to an appellant for making

personal presentation of the case. Appeal Committee, therefore, decided to grant

second (2nd) opportunity to the appellant for making personal presentation of the

case.

AND WHEREAS Dr. R.P. Chaudhur, Principal and Dr. Shivram Choudhary,

Office Assistant, Government Sanskrit College, Bihar presented the case of the

appellant institution on 21.08.2017. In the appeal and during personal presentation,

it is submitted that due to unavoidable technical reason, they submitted DO of Rs.

I

1500001- agai~st online payment. As per instructions for filling up the onlineI

application 6(ii) Ipayment is permissible through demand draft.

II

AND WHEREAS the Committee noted that according to the instructions forI

submitting on-lihe application issued by the NCTE, the payment gateway providesI

for three modek of payment only, viz. Credit Card, Debit Card and Net-banking.I .

Therefore, payrhent by any other mode such as demand draft is not permitted. In. Ithese circumstances., the Committee concluded that the ERC was justified in

!refusing recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order

Iof the ERC confirmed.

I

IAND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the

I .

documents avaiilable on records and considering the oral arguments advanced

during the heari11ng,the Committee concluded that the ERC was justified in refusing

recognition and therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the

ERC is confirm~d.I

INOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the 0 der appealed

against. III (SanJay Awasthi)I Member Secretary

1. The Principal, Government Sanskrit College, Kajipur Road, No.4, PatnaSadar, Patnal, Bihar - 800004

2. The Secreta~, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & Uiteracy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Dir~ctor, Eastern Regional Committee, (NCTE), 15, Neelkanth Nagar,Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar - 751 012

4. The Secreta~, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Bihar,Palna. 1

ORDER

R9i-f--'-" .•••.••NCTE

F.No.89-176/2017Appeal/14thMeeting-2017NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION

HansBhawan,Wing II, 1, BahadurshahZafarMarg,NewDelhi- 110002

Date: Ib)' ~\ 'I

WHEREAS the appeal of Mahatma Buddha Teachers Training College,

Sitamarhi, Bihar dated 02/03/2017 is against the Order No. ER -

213.6(i).23/ERCAPP2486/D.EI.Ed. (Addl. Course)/2016/46276 dated 02/05/2017 of

the Eastern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.EI.Ed.

course on the grounds that "(i) The M.Ed. mark sheet of one faculty namely Sashi

Ranjan is a down loaded copy without signature of the issuing authority wherein, it

is clearly written "this cannot be treated as original mark sheet". Hence the

Committee could not ascertain the % of marks and the authenticity of M.Ed. Degree.

(ii) The M.Ed . mark sheet of one faculty namely Mukesh Kumar is not legible. Hence

the Committee could not ascertain the % marks and the authenticity of M.Ed.

Degree. (iii) The mark sheet of M.A. in Education of one faculty namely Madhu

Kumari is a provisional Mark Sheet without seal and signature of the issuing

authority. (iv) Copies of educational certificates/marksheet of Dharmendra Kumar

(Fine Art Teacher), Kumari Bharati (Music Teacher) and Reeta Gupta (Physical

Education Teacher not submitted."

AND WHEREAS Mahatma Buddha Teachers Training College, Sitamarhi,

Bihar was asked to present the case of the appellant institution on 05/05/2017 but

nobody appeared. In the appeal memoranda it is submitted that "ERC did not point

out the said deficiency and did not issue show cause notice in accordance with

section 15(3)(b) of NCTE Act and Regulation 7(17) of NCTE Regulations, 2014. The

institution had the original and attested copy of M.Ed. Degree of the faculty which

could have been submitted to ERC, if the said deficiency was pointed out. ERC did

not point out deficiency and did not issue show cause notice as per section 15(3)(b)

of NCTE Act and Regulation,7(17) of NCTE Regulations, 2014. The institution had

provisional mark sheet issued by the competent authority which could have been

submitted to ERC, if the said deficiency was pointed out. ERC did not point out

deficiency and did not issue show cause notice as per section 15(3)(b) of NCTE Act

and Regulation 7(17) of NCTE Regulations, 2014. Institution had submitted the

~2 ,-

Ieducational c~rtificate / mark sheet of Dharmendra Kumar (Fine Art Teacher),

!Kumari Bharati (Mus:ic Teacher) and Reeta Gupta (Physical Education Teacher) to

ERC. H6wevJr, still if the ERC would have pointed out the said deficiency, the

institution woJld have rectified the same by submitting necessary certificates. TheI

committee wa~ not jUstified to observe that it was not possible to grant additional

unit. The com~ittee ought to have followed the procedure of issuing show causeI

notice and if the institution would have submitted the necessary documents, theI

ERC should ~ave granted permission for additional unit of 50 students for the

academic session 2016-17 or 2017-18 as the case may be."I

AND wtEREAS Appeal Committee noted that Hon'ble High Court of Delhi

vide order dated 20.02.2017 in WP. Case No. 39545/2016 and no. 39550/2016 has

directed the aJpellant to file appeal which was needed to be considered by Appellate!

Committee b~fore 03.03.2017 i.e. the last date for granting approval. .Appeal

Committee no~ed that appellant's request and appeal papers were received in theI

office of NCTE on 03~03.2017 and as such there was no way the appeal could have

been decidedl before 03.03.2017. The appellant was asked to appear beforeI

Appeal Comm'ittee on 05.05.2017 for making personal presentation of the case but

appellant did hot appear. Sh. Roop Kishore Mahto, Secretary of the appellanti .

institution app~ared before the Appeal Committee on 22.08.2017 and reiterated its

submission m~de in the appeal Memoranda.I 'I

iI

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution had

applied for graint of 2 units of D.EI.Ed. programme and after issue of Letter of Intent, Iunder clause 7.(13) submitted list of faculty with a request to grant recognition for 2

units of D.EI.Eld. programme. ERC on consideration of the list of faculty found thatI

the list of faculty submitted by the appellant institution was lacking on ground thatI .

M.Ed. degree rnd M.A marksheet of 3 ~embers of faculty were not submitted.

IAND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that ERC issued recognition order

I

dated 02.05.2b16 granting recognition for one unit of D.EI.Ed. programme as. .deficiencies n<?ted in the faculty list could not have been removed by appellant

Ibefore the cut ptf date Le. 02.05.2017 for grant of recognition for the academic year

I .2017 -18. The !deficiencies were not intimated to the appellant institution before

Igranting recog:nition for one unit of the D.EI.Ed. programme. Appeal Committee

I

further noted that decision of ERC not to issue Show Cause Notice (SCN) before

grant of formal recognition for one unit was taken in greater interest of the appellant

institution as issue of SCN and rectification of deficiencies may have resulted in

losing of enrolment of students for the session 2016-17.

AND WHEREAS appellant in its submission by Dhruv Kishor Mahto, Secretary

of the institution before the Appeal Committee on 22.08.2017 has submitted copies

of relevant degree and documents pertaining to faculty in whose case these

documents were found to be deficient. Appeal Committee, therefore, decided to

remand back the case to ERC for grant of second unit of D.EI.Ed programme for the

next academic year.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit,

documents on record and oral argument advanced during the hearing, Appeal

Committee concluded to remand back the case to ERC for considering the

rectification of deficiencies reported by the appellant institution. The appellant

institution should submit copies of relevant degrees, certificates and mark sheets to

ERC within 15 days of the issue of appeal orders.

NOW THEREFORE, .the Council hereby remands back the case ofMahatma Buddha Teachers Training College, Plot No. 1775, Village - DhrubNagar, PO-Kamaldah Panchmile, Tehsil-Bathnaha, Sitamarhi, Bihar to the ERC,NCTE, for necessary action as indicated above.


1. The Secretary, Mahatma Buddha Teachers Training College, Plot No. 1775,Village - Dhrub Nagar, PO-Kamaldah Panchmile, Tehsil-Bathnaha, Sitamarhf,Bihar - 843322


3. Regional Director, Eastern Regional Committee, (NCTE), 15, Neelkanth Nagar,Nayapalli, Bhubaneshwar - 751 012

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Bihar,Patna.

ORDER

R~~NCTE


Hans Bhawan, Wing 11,1,Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi -110002

Date: '6h~\1WHEREAS the appeal of Shri Ram Teachers Training College, Kanpur Nagar,

Uttar Pradesh dated 26.02.2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-

10860/260th Meeting/2016/163335 dated 20/12/2016 of the Northern Regional

Committee, refusing recognition for conducting D.EI.Ed. course on the grounds that

"The institution was given show cause notice vide letter dt. 20/09/2016 with direction

to submit the reply within 30 days. The institution did not submit any reply of show

cause notice till date."

AND WHEREAS Sh. Manoj Singh, Trustee, Shri Ram Teachers Training

College, Kanpur Nagar, Uttar Pradesh was asked to present the case of the

appellant institution on 22.08.2017 and submitted proof that it is a composite

institution with in time. Letter received in NCTE dated 20/10/2016."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution submitted

online application dated 27.05.2015 seeking recognition for conducting D.EI.Ed.

programme. The appellant institution did not submit any information on page 2, 4 &

5 of the application form which relates to existing programmes or details of

applications seeking recognition for programmes other than teacher education

programmes. Clause 3(a) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014 prescribes that

'recognition for commencement of new teacher education programmes will be

offered in composite institution.' A composite institution is defined in clause 2(b) of

the NCTE Regulations, 2014 as under:

tl 'Composite institution' means a duly recognised higher education institution

offering under undergraduate or post graduate programmes of study in the field of

liberal arts or humanity or social science or sciences or commerce or mathematics,

as the case may be, at the time of applying for recognition of teacher education

programme. "

1

l.

I

IAND WHEREAS Appeal Committee further noted that a Show Cause Notice

dated 20.09.2p16 was issued to applicant institution on the ground that it has not

submitted an~ proof/evidence of being a composite institution as per clause 2(b) of

the Regulations. Committee further noted that impugned refusal order dated

20.12.2016 islon the ground that no reply to SCNwas submitted whereas appellant

stated that redly to SCN was submitted on 20.10.2016 diarised at serial no. 153194I .

of NRC JaiPul

AND W~EREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution vide its reply

dated 20.10.2p16 has first stated that an institution need not be composite as per

NCTE Regulations and then subsequently stated that appellant society is having SriI

Ram Law College under it agies. Appellant further stated that appellant society is

also having a Degree College at Ghatampur, Kanpur Nagar.

AND WrEREAS Appeal Committee after noting the submission made by

appellant noted that address of the Degree College is different from the address ofI

proposed Te$cher Training College and also the name of applicant society is

different. Furt~er, the law college cannot be termed as an institution which qualifiesI

for making an!institution composite under clause 2(b) of the Regulations.II

i .AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee after going through the facts narrated in

para 5 and 6 Jbove decided to confirm the impugned refusal order dated 20/12/2016. I

issued by NRC issued by NRC, Jaipur.IIII


documents atailable on records and considering the oral arguments advanced

during the he~ring, the Committee concluded that the NRC was justified in refusing

recognition a~d therefore, the appeal deserved to be rejected and the order of the

NRC is confir~ed.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms theagainst.

1. The Secretary, Shri Ram Teachers Training College, 1449, 1435, 1434, 1433,1432, 1431, Free Hold Ragistry, Nandana, Kanpur Nagar, Uttar Pradesh -209206


3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II,L1C Building, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of UttarPradesh, Lucknow.

ORDER

~~ ....'l..,...NCT10


HansShawan,Wing II, 1, SahadurshahZafarMarg,NewDelhi- 110002

Date: 'b 1,~ \ ....,

WHEREAS the appeal of Sri Krishna Janka Devi Mahavidyalaya, Uttar

Pradesh dated 12.03.2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-

12707l260th Meeting/2016/16442-27 dated 04/01/2017 of the Northern Regional

Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.EI.Ed. course on the grounds that

"The institution was given show cause notice vide letter dated 16.11.2015 with

direction to submit the reply within 30 days. The institution did not submit any reply

of show cause notice till date."

AND WHEREAS Ms. Prem Kanti, Manager, Sri Krishna Janka Devi

Mahavidyalaya, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of the appellant institution on

22.08.2017 and submitted that "Application for issuing the NOC for B.EI.Ed. course

is under process in the affiliating body Le. Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University,

Kanpur."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that a Show Cause Notice (SCN)

dated 16.11.2015 was issued to appellant institution on ground of its failure to submit

NOC of affiliating body. Appellant vide its appeal memoranda has stated that its

application for grant of Noe is still under process of the affiliating body Le.

Chatrapati Sahu ji' Maharaj University, Kanpur. Clause 5(3) of NCTE Regulations,

2014 provides for submission of NOC issued by affiliating body alongwith scanned

copy of the application. Clause 7(i) of the Regulation provides for summary rejection

of all such applications which are not accompanied by requisite documents or are

incomplete.

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee after noting that appellant institution has

not been able to submit NOC of Affiliating body, decided to confirm the impugned

refusal order dated 04/01/2017 issued by NRC.I'

AND WH1EREASafter perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the

documents av~ilable on records and considering the oral arguments advanced, I .during the hea~ing, the Committee concluded that the NRC was justified in refusing


NRC is confir~ed.II

NOW nitEREFoRE, the Council hereby confirms theagainst.

(Sa jay Awasthi)Member Secretary

1. The Manager, Sri Krishna Janka Devi Mahavidyalaya, Naharpur, Rura,Kanpur Detlat, Uttar Pradesh - 209303

2. The Secreta1ry,Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation &1 Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II,L1CBuilding!,Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secret~ry, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of UttarPradesh, Lu'cknow.

I

I

ORDER

8F.No.89-191/2017Appeal/14thMeeting-2017

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATIONHansBhawan,Wing II, 1, BahadurshahZafarMarg,NewDelhi- 110002

Date: l~h~\IWHEREAS The appeal of S.S. Degree College, Uttar Pradesh dated

03.03.2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-10895/260th

Meeting/2016/164415 dated 04/01/2017 of the Northern Regional Committee,

refusing recognition for conducting B.P.Ed. course on the grounds that "The

institution was given show cause notice vide letter dated 06.11.2015 with direction

to submit the reply within 30 days. The institution did not submit any reply of show

cause notice till date."

AND WHEREAS Sh. Rohit Kumar, Clerk, S.S. Degree College, Uttar Pradesh

presented the case of the appellant institution on 22.08.2017 and submitted that "the

institution is recognised for conducting Arts and Sciences Degree College since

2014. The affiliating body Le. Chattrapati Shahu ji Maharaj University, Kanpur has

imposed a ban on issue of fresh NOC and said that applicant institution does not

require NOC as it is already conducting B.A/B.Sc. courses."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that a Show Cause Notice (SCN)

dated 06.11.2015 was issued to applicant institution on the ground that NOC of

affiliating body was not submitted with the hard copy of application. Appeal

Committee further noted that appellant institution did not submit reply to the SCN

and on issue of the impugned refusal order has come up with a justification that

NOC is not required. Clause 5(3) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014 stipulates that

NOe issued by affiliating body is to be submitted alongwith application. For the

purpose of submission of NOC no differentiation is made between an existing or a

new institution. Also the appellant has failed to submit reply to the SCN dated

06.11.15.

AND WHEREAS Appeal committee, therefore, decided to confirm the

impugned refusal order dated 04/01/2017 issued by NRC.

,I

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the memorandum of appeal, affidavit, the,. documents av,ilable on records and considering the oral arguments advanced

during the hearing, the Committee concluded that the NRC was justified in refusingI


NRC is confirmrd. . .

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the 0 er appealedagainst. I .~

(SanJay Awasthi)Member Secretary

1. The Manager, S.S. Degree College, Jatuli Hariyawan Hardoi, Village - JatuliPost - Hari~awan, Hardoi, Uttar Pradesh - 241001

2. The Secretafy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & ILiteracy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Dililector, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II,L1C Building, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secreta~, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of UttarPradesh, Lutknow.

I

ORDER

RNCTE


Hans Bhawan. Wing II. 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

Date: Ib h~\'1WHEREAS the appeal ?f Sri Vidya College of Education, P. Kumaralingapuram,

Virudhunagar, Tamil Nadu dated 04.03.2017 is against the Order No.

SRO/NCTE/NRCAPP201630071/B.Ed-AIITN/2017-18/ dated 28/02/2017 of the Southern

Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed. - AI course on the grounds

that "1. They have fulfilled all requirements no doubt. 2. but, the fact remains that it will not

be in accordance with Regulations to go beyond 2 units of B.Ed. 3. It will be unfair to them

to say 'No' now. But. it will be 'illegal to say 'yes' to them. While expressing regret for the

avoidable inconvenience caused to them by our earlier order in another case. we have no

option, but to reject his application. 4. Return FOR's. if any. 5. Close the file. 6. Issue the

Rejection order."

AND WHEREAS Sh. K. Angayan Kumaran, CEO and Dr. P. Raja. Principal, Sri Vidya

College of Education, P. Kumaralingapuram, Virudhunagar. Tamil Nadu presented the case

of the appellant institution on 22.08.2017. Appellant submitted that "All conditions have been

fulfilled for additional intake of 1 unit B.Ed. It is not published in the public notice issued in

March 2016. If it is so. our application for Additional 1 unit B.Ed. must not have been

entertained by NCTE Southern Region, Bangalore, and inspection must not have been

taken to issue rejection order. It 'isfair to say "Yes" and even legal to say "yes" since another

institution in Tamil Nadu was granted permission to issue LOI for B.Ed. Additional 1 unit in

the 329th Meeting of SRC held on 6th and 7th February 2017. Original FDRs are with us.

Kindly don't close the file and consider it favourably Because all relevant infrastructure has

been created. Kindly issue the LOI for Additional 1 unit of B.Ed."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution submitted online

application dated 31.05.2016 seeking recognition for an additional intake of one unit of its

existing B.Ed. programme. Appeal Committee further noted that the appellant institution

was inspected on 11th _12th February, 2017 and the Visiting Team after noting that institution

is already recognised for condiucting B.Ed. programme with an intake of 100 seats,

recommended grant of an additional unit. The appellant institution was refused recognition

for additional unit of B.Ed. on the ground that according to New Regulations, the maximum

intake permissible is only two units and the appellant institution is already having B.Ed. (2units). i .

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee in this context noted that para 3.1 of Appendix 4

relating to Norms and Standards for B.Ed. programme mentions that there shall be a basic

unit of 50 students, with a maximum of two units. Para 6.1 of the norms further laydown that

'For an annual intake beyond two hundred and upto three hundred, it shall possess land of

3500 Sq. Meters. Appeal Committee also noted that appellant institution is an established

institution already conducting B.Ed. and D.EI.Ed. programme since 2007 and M.Ed.

programme since 2016. Such composite institutions are allowed to expand by adding to the

built up area as prescribed under para 6.1 of the Norms and Standards for B.Ed. programme

(Appendix 4). In9rease in intake beyond 2 units is not permissible in such institutions which

are not composite.

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee is also of the considered view that had it been

the intention of ~RC not to allow additional intake beyond two units in composite institutions

the application should not have been processed and inspection also should not have been

conducted. Appeal Committee decided to set aside the impugned refusal order dated

28/02/2017 with a direction to further process the application. It is also advised that

refusallrejection orders issued by SRC should be appropriately worded so as to avoid

internal expressions while decision making by the Committee.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit, documents on

record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal Committee concluded to

set aside the impugned rejection order dated 28/02/2017 with a direction to further process

the application.

NOW THEREFORE, after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit,documents on record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, AppealCommittee cohcluded to set aside the impugned rejection order dat 28/02/2017 wita direction to further process the application.

(Sanjay AwasthiMember Secretary

1. The Managing Trustee, Sri Vidya College of Education, P. Kumaralingapuram,Sivakasi Main Road, Virudhunagar, Tamil Nadu - 626005


3. Regiona'i Director, Southern Regional Committee, NCTE, Jnana Bharathi CampusRoad, Nagarabhavi, Opp. National Law School, Bangalore - 560 072

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Karnataka,Bangalore.

I

RHCTE



Date: ,bl,tSf, ,ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of B.U. College of Education, Sangrur, Punjab dated

28.02.2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-13246/251 sl


recognition for conducting B.A. B.Ed.lB.Sc. B.Ed. course on the grounds that "The

institution has not submitted the reply of show cause notice dt. 01/03/2016."

AND WHEREAS Sh. Luqman Asad, Member Secretary and Sh. Abdu .Rashid,

President, B U College of Education, Sangrur, Punjab presented the case of appellant

institution on 22.08.2017 and submitted that "the decision of NRC, NCTE is not correct

because this institution, B U College of Education has already submitted reply of 1st

show cause notice vide this office letter no. NCTE-BUCE/18/B.A.B.Ed. dated

27/02/2016 (NRC, NCTE receipt no. 133166 dt. 29/02/2016 refers.) and reply of 2nd

show cause notice vide this office letter no. NCTE-BUCE/26/B.A.B.Ed. dated 20-

22/04/2016 (NRC, NCTE receipt no. 139533 dt. 26/04/2016 refers.) It is again

submitted that BU College of Education is an existing teacher education institution duly

recognized by NRC, NCTE vide NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-832/200Ih Meeting/2012/24173

dt. 28/06/2012 and conducting D.EI.Ed. programme since the year 2012. It is further

submitted that, B U College of Education has also mentioned in the online form applied

for grant of permission to conduct B.A. B.Ed. 1 B.Sc. B.Ed. course. You are therefore,

requested to set aside the incorrect decision of NRC, NCTE and grant to this institution

B.A. B.Ed. / B.Sc. B.Ed. course. Needless to mention, this institution has already

created all the infrastructure meeting NCTE Norms to conduct B.A. B.Ed. 1 B.Sc. B.Ed.

course."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted the impugned refusal order dated

11.01.2017 was issued by NRC Jaipur on the ground that the institution has not

submitted reply to Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 01.03.2016. The SCN dated

01.03.2016 was on the ground that institution has not submitted evidence that it is a

composite institution as per clause 2(b) of Regulations, 2014. Prior to the issue of SCN

the appellant institution was inspected on 21.01.2016. Page 3 of the Inspection Report

I

IIIII

which gives infdrmation about other courses being conducted at the site of inspectionI

is missing fromlthe inspection report. The appellant has, however, submitted required

information abd,ut the existing programmes being conducted by the appellant society.I

As regards submitting a reply to SeN dated 01.03.2016, appellant submitted a copy ofI

its reply to SCN which is shown received in the office of NRC and diarised at Diary No.

133533 dated ~6.04.2016. The above said letter is not available on the regulatory file of

NRC. III

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee, therefore, decided to remand back the case

to NRC for colnsidering the reply dt. 22/04/2016 (received in the office of NRC on

26/04/2016). Appellant is required to re-submit a copy of its reply dated 22/04/2016 to

NRC alongwit~ enclosure within 15 days of the issue of Appeal orders.I

AND WJEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal affidavit documents

on record an~ oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal Committee, .

concluded to iemand back the case NRC for considering the reply dated 22/04/2016

which was received in the office of NRC on 26/04/2016. Appellant is required to

resubmit a Co~y of its letter dated 22/04/2016 alongwith the enclosure to NRC Jaipur

within 15 days! of the issue of Appeal orders.

II

NOW liHEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of S.U.College of Etlucation, Nabha Road, Upoki (Uppal Kheri), Maler Kotla, Sangrur,

I

Punjab to the NRC, NCTE, for necessary action as indicated abov


1. The Chairman, S.U. College of Education, Nabha Road, Upoki (Uppal Kheri),.Maler Kotll~' Sangrur, Punjab -148023

2. The Secre~ary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

I

3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1CBuilding, BJhawaniSingh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Punjab,I .

Haryana. Ii

IiI

II

II

ORDER

RNCTE



Date: lbll~ rl

WHEREAS the appeal of Rajputana T.T. College, Kotputli, Jaipur, Rajasthan

dated 06.03.2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NGTE/NRCAPP-15591/261st

Meeting/2016/164946 dated 10/01/2017 of the Northern Regional Committee,

refusing recognition for conducting B.A. B.Ed.! B.Sc. B.Ed. course on the grounds

that "Applicant institution's name is Rajputana Teachers Training College, whereas

the NOC issued by the affiliating body is for Rajputana PG College. The institution

has not given clarification to the show cause notice on this point. The application

columns remain blank regarding existing Teacher Education programme/other

programmes. The institution is not running any programme at present (NCTE

Regulations, 2014 under clause 2(b) and has not enclosed the affiliation copy of

those programmes. Hence, does not fulfil the requirement of composite institution.

The building plan does not bear plot no. and land record address corresponding to

other documents. Why two land documents were enclosed with two different

ownerships. The discrepancies exist in the land ownership, plot no. 619's ownership

is in the name of an individual and not the institution. The building completion

certificate indicates possession of plot no. 619. This is against the requirement as

per NCTE Regulations, 2014: The reply given by the institution is not clear."

AND WHEREAS Sh. M.S. Choudhary, President, Rajputana T.T. College,

Kotputli, Jaipur, Rajasthan presented the case of the appellant institution on

22.08.2017 and submitted that "Both institutions are same and NOC and affiliation

order is attached with it Secretary name Land is extra."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that impugned refusal order dated

10.01.2017 was issued by NRC on following grounds:

(i) Applicant institution name is Rajputana Teacher Training College whereas

NOC is issued by affiliating body in the name of the 'Rajputana P.G. College.

(ii) Related columns in the 'application form are blank.

(iii) Institution is not running any programme and is not composite.

(iv) Building Plan does not bear plot number.I

(v) Land documents are enclosed with two different ownerships." ': I, i

I

AND WH,EREAS Appeal Committee noted that Rajputana Shiksha Anushthan

Sansthan, Kotbutli is the applicant society which made online application dated

30.06,2015 se~king recognition for B.A B.Ed.! B.Sc. B.Ed. programme. The NOCI

issued by UniVersity of Rajasthan, Jaipur and submitted by appellant institution onI .

18.03.2016 aftkr issue of Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 11.12.2015 was in the

name of RajpJtana P.G. College and was issued by affiliating body after the cut-offI

date for receip,t of applications. The date of issue of NOC being late the NOC was

not acceptablJ and NRC should not have processed the application further and

conducted ins~ection. .. TI

IAND WHEREAS application was processed further by NRC and an inspection

I

of the institutidn was also conducted on 30.05.2016. The inspection report revealsI

that the applicant society is already conducting graduation and post-graduation levelI

courses in the! same campus which is confirmed by orders issued by University of

Rajasthan, Jaibur. The appellant during the course of appeal presentation submittedI

a building plan' which bears plot number/khasra number as filed up in the application

form. It is dUlY!supported by Building Completion Certificate (BCC) issued by Asstt.I

Engineer, Padchayat Samiti Kothputli.I

IAND W~EREAS keeping in view the facts stated in para 4 & 5 above, Appeal

Committee de~ided to remand back the case to NRC for re-examination of the case

afresh keepin~ in view that:I

(i) NOC submitted by appellant institution was time barred.I

(ii) Institution is stated to be composite by the Visiting Team.

(iii) APpell~nt has submitted the building plan and BCC approved by competent

authority ahd the documents bear plot identification no.II

II

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit,I .

documents' o~ record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, AppealI

Committee concluded to remand back the case to NRC for revisiting the case in light

of point (i), (ii)!& (iii) of para 6.

IIIIII

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case ofRajputana T.T. College, Shyam Nagar, Dabla Road, Kotputli, Jaipur, Rajasthanto the NRC, NCTE, for nece~sary action as indicated above.

( anjay AwasthiMember Secretary

1. The Secretary, Rajputana T.T. College, Shyam Nagar, Dabla Road, Kotputli,Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303108


3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II,L1C Building, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government ofRajasthan, Jaipur.

ORDER

RNC'",


HansBhawan,Wing 11,1,BahadurshahZafarMarg,NewDelhi -110 002

Date: 16rt~\ I

WHEREAS the appeal of Sneha B.Ed. College, Markapur, Prakasam, Andhra

Pradesh dated 08/03/2017 is against the Order No.

SRO/NCTE/SRCAPP2459/B.Ed/AP/2016-17/91309 dated 24/01/2017 of the

Southern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.Ed. course on

the grounds that "they have not replied to the LOI issued on February 2016 for B.Ed.

(2 units). We cannot wait indefinitely. Reject the application. Return FDRs, if any.

Close the file."

AND WHEREAS Sh. G.v. Subrahmaniam, Joint Secretary, Sneha B.Ed.

College, Markapur, Prakasam, Andhra Pradesh presented the case of the appellant

institution on 22/08/2017 and stated that "the appellant institution could not follow

up its case with the affiliating body due to ill health of the correspondent and delay

occurred in giving reply to the LOI. Also no Show Cause Notice was received by

the institution before issue of rejection order".

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that proviso to section 14/15 (3) (b)

of the NCTE Act provides for giving a reasonable' opportunity to the institution for

making a written representation before passing order of refusal. SRC in this case

has not issued a Show Cause Notice to the appellant institution before issuing

impugned refusal order dated 24/01/2017. Appeal Committee, therefore, decided

to remand back the case to SRC for following the procedure prescribed under the

NCTE Act before issuing necessary order under section 14/15 of the NCTE Act.


documents on record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal

Committee concluded to remand back the case to SRC for issue of Show Cause

Notice (SCN) to the appellant institution in compliance with proviso to Section 14/15

(3) (0) of the NCTE Act.

I

III

II

IIII

NOW THFREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of SnehaB.Ed. College, 147/2, Sai Balaji Educational Society, Gorugunthalapadu',Mar,kapur, Pra!kasam,Andhra Pradesh to the SRC, NCTE, for necessary actionas indicated above.


1. The Secretary, Sneha B.Ed. College, 147/2, Sai Balaji Educational Society,Gorugunth~lapadu, Markapur, Prakasam, Andhra Pradesh - 523332 .

2. The Secreta~, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & lLiteracy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Southern Regional Committee, NCTE, Jnana Bharathi CampusRoad, Naga~abhavi, Opp. National Law School, Bangalore - 560 072

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government ofAndhra pralSh, H¥derabad.

I

I

,...--'

ORDER

RNCTE



Date: ,b' ,tSf, ~

WHEREAS the appeal of Ujas College of Education, Sangner, Jaipur,

Rajasthan dated 06/03/2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-

10772/258th Meeting/2016/173444-50 dated 02/05/2017 of the Northern Regional

Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.A. B.Ed. course on the grounds

that "the institution was given show cause notice vide letter dt. 15.12.2015 with

direction to submit the reply within 30 days. The institution did not submit any reply

of show cause notice till date."

AND WHEREAS Sh. P. K. Gupta, Director and Ms. Lata Sharma, P.A, Ujas

College of Education, Sangner, Jaipur, Rajasthan presented the case of the

appellant institution on 22/08/2017 and submitted that "Reply to Show Cause Notice

was submitted on 18/01/2016. Further the NOC from University of Rajasthan was

submitted to NRC on 18/04/2016".

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution submitted

online application dated 27/05/2015 seeking recognition for 4 year Integrated B.A

B.Ed/B.Sc B.Ed programme. Appellant did not submit alongwith its application NOe

of the affiliating body for which a Show Cause Notice (SCN) was also issued on

15/12/2015. The appellant submitted. reply dated 18/04/2016 to the SCN and

submitted with it copy of NOC dated 16/04/2016 issued by University of Rajasthan,

Jaipur. The impugned refusal order dated 02/05/2017 for the reason that 'the

institution did not submit any reply of Show Cause Notice till date' is not justified and

t~nable on the ground that institution did not submit reply to SCN.

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee, however, took note of the provision

contained in clause 5(3) of the NCTE Regulation, 2014 which stipulates that online

application shall be submitted alongwith processing fee and scanned copies of

documents such as NOC issued by concerned affiliating body. Appeal Committee

noted that the NOC was submitted by the appellant with its reply to SCN is dated

iIIIII,i!i

16/04/2016 wh~reas the online application is dated 27/05/2015. The NOC issued

by affiliating b~dy on 16/04/2016 cannot be treated as acceptable document as,application was submitted in May, 2015 and last date for submitting hard copy of

Iapplication wa$ 15.7.2015. Appeal Committee therefore, decided to confirm the

impugned refu~al order dated 02/05/2017 issued by NRC.I

IAND Wt;tEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, Affidavit,

documents on: record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal

Committee corcluded to confirm the impugned refusal order dated 02/05/2017

issued by NRCj.

I,NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order appealed

against. IIi

iIIIIi

1. The Secretary, Ujas College of Education, Vill.-Ganwar Brahmnan PostDadiya ~atika Teh-Sanganer, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303905

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department ofSchool E~ucation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regionall Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1C ~uilding, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005,Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government ofRajasthah, Jaipur.

IIiI

R'MeTE


Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

ORDER

WHEREAS the appeal of Pt. Tripurari Mishra Adarsh Mahavidalaya, Azamgarh, Uttar

Pradesh dated 26.02.2017 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-8509/261st


recognition for conducting B.Ed. course on the grounds that 'The institution has not

submitted the reply of show cause notice dated 08.09.2016 issued by the NRC, NCTE in

stipulated time period."

AND WHEREAS Sh. Prashant Mishra, Office Clerk and Sh. Shubham Mishra, Clerk,

Pt. Tripurari Mishra Adarsh Mahavidalaya, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh presented the case of

the appellant institution on 22.08.2017. In the appeal Memoranda, it is stated that "Due to

non issue of recognition order, the faculty members could not join and therefore their

documents were not available in the institution."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that a Letter of Intent dated 06.06.2015

was issued to appellant institution seeking compliance within a period of two months

subsequently a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 14.08.2015 was issued on ground of non

submission of reply to LOI and further requiring the appellant institution of furnish NOC from

affiliating body and an affidavit regarding composite nature of the institution. After

considering the reply dated 15.09.2015 submitted by the appellant institution, NRC issued

the first refusal order dated 09.10.2015 on the ground of non submission of (i) list of faculty

and (ii) NOC of affiliating body. The above refusal order dated 09.10.2015 was appealed

against and Appellant Body issued appeal order dated 23.03.2016 remanding back the case

to NRC for considering the compliance report to be submitted by appellant institution within

15 days of the issue of Appeal orders. Appeal orders were based on the appellant's

statement that i) it had submitted timely reply to SCN and ii) has received approval of

affiliating body.

AND WHEREAS the impugned refusal order issued by NRC on 27.12.216 is on the

ground that 'Institution has not submitted the reply to Show Cause Notice dated 08.09.2016

issued by NRC in a stipulated time period.' Appeal Committee does not find on the relevant

regulatory file any communication from the appellant institution which can be termed to be

in compliance oflthe earlier Appeal order dated 23.03.2016 wherein appellant was asked to

submit a comPIi~n<~ereport within 15 days of the issue of appeal orders.I,

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee observed that appellant alongwith its Appeal

Memoranda has/made available a list of 15faculty and ~ne HOD approved by Veer Bahadur

Singh Purvanch?1 University, Jaunpur on 12.02.2016 but it is also a fact that no complianceI

was reported to NRC Jaipur. Appellant's plea that faculty could not join as recognition order

was not issued jbY NRC is not sustainable as submission of list of faculty approved by

affiliating body ~Iongwith necessary particulars of the faculty is a pre-requisite to issue ofI

formal recogniti~n.I

I,AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee is convinced that reasons given by appellant

!institution for nbn-submission of a) reply to show cause notice dated 8.9.2016 and of

I

compliance redort in accordance with earlier appeal order dated 23.3.2016, are notI

justifiable and Itenable. The impugned refusal order dated 27.12.2016 is therefore,I

confirmed. I!I

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit, documents on

records and orJI arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal Committee concluded to

confirm the imJ,ugned refusal order dated 27.12.2016 as reply to show cause notice dated

8.9.2016 and domPliance as required under 1st Appeal order dated 23.3.2016 were not

submitted by a~pellant institution.II

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby confirms the Order app aled against.I

I

IIi

I1. The Ma~ager, Pt. Tripurari Mishra Adarsh Mahavidhyalaya, Rohuwa Mustafabad,

Garha ~zamgarh, Vill-Kharaiia PO-Saraipaltoo, Dist. Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh -2763021 .

2. The Se9retary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of SchoolEducation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Region~1 Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1CBUildingl,Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of UttarPradesH, Lucknow.

I

ORDER

RNCTE


HansBhawan,Wing 11,1,BahadurshahZafarMarg,NewDelhi-110 002

Date: 1 6 r. \ t:s\\"

WHEREAS the appeal of Bharathiyar College of Education, Attur, Salem, Tamil

Nadu dated 10/12/201,6 is against the Order No. SRO/NCTE

/SRCAPP3490/B.A. B.Ed/B.Sc.B.EdITN/2016-17/79065 dated 22/12/2015 of the

Southern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.A. B.Ed.lB.Sc.

B.Ed. course on the ground of "Non-submission of NOC issued by the affiliating body

along with application."

AND WHEREAS Sh. K. Ramaswamy, Secretary and Sh. S. Kumar, Admin

Officer, Bharathiyar College of Education, Attur, Salem, Tamil Nadu

was asked to presented the case of the appellant institution on 22.08.2016 and

submitted that "since there was a confusion to get NOC either from Periyar

University or Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University, we waited for clarification.

The NOC was finally issued by TTEU on 05.01.2016."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that submission of NOC issued by

affiliating body alongwith application is a mandatory requirement under clause 5(3)

read with clause 7(1) of the NCTE Regulations, 2014. As the appellant institution

has failed to submit NOC issued by affiliating body even in response to the SCN

dated 21.10.2015, the issue of impugned refusal order dated 22.12.2015 is justified.

Moreover, appellant has preferred appeal at a much belated stage Le. after 10

months of delay and has also not stated any reason for the delay.

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee keeping in view the circumstances

narrated in para 3 above, decided to confirm the impugned refusal order dated

22.12.2015.


documents on records and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal

Committee concluded to confirm the impugned refusal order dated 22.12.2015.

IIi

. NOW THiEREFORE,theagall'~sL, . I .

IIII

Council hereby confirms the


I1. The Seqretary, Bharathiyar College of Education, 49/3, 4A, Own,

Deviyakurichi, Attur, Salem, Tamil Nadu- 6361122. The Sec~etary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of

School E~ucation & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.3. Regional i Director, Southern Regional Committee, NCTE, Jnana Bharathi

Campus Road, Nagarabhavi, Opp. National Law School, Bangalore - 5600724. The Sedetary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of

Tamil Na~ut Chennai.

III

ii

i

ORDER

~.. ~~~-F.NO.89-774/2016 Appeal/14th Meeting-2017

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATIONHans Shawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002

Date: \bll~r-,WHEREAS the appeal of Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Sarnala Road, Sirsa,

Haryana dated 25/11/2016 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-10163/257st

(Part-3)/2016/159128 dated 27/09/2016 of the Northern Regional Committee, refusing

recognition for conducting D.P.Ed. Course on the grounds that "there is no evidence that

the list of the teachers submitted by the applicant institution has been approved by the

Hon'ble Vice-Chancellor of the University and the same has not been signed by the

Registrar of the University, It has been sent to the NRC by the Dean, Faculty of Education.

Faculty appointed by the University is not as per Regulations, 2014."

AND WHEREAS Sh. Kuldip Kumar, Assistant Registrar and Prof. Monika, Professor,

Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Haryana presented the case of the

appellant institution on 23/03/2017 and 22.08.2017 in the appeal and during personal

presentation it was submitted that "the University was already having sufficient faculty for

D.P.Ed. course at the time of filing the reply to show cause notice. However, the separate

lists of faculty members were attached. Now, the consolidated list of faculty members in the

Department of Physical Education is attached which is approved by the Vice-Chancellor

and signed by the Registrar of the University. The appointment of Physiotherapist has been

made and he has joined."

AND WHEREAS in the course of presentation, the appellant gave a letter dated

23.03.2017 requesting an opportunity to re-submit all the relevant documents relating both

to B.P.Ed. and D.P.Ed. courses. The Committee acceded to the request and decided to

give the appellant another opportunity i.e. the second opportunity to present their case.

AND WHEREAS Prof. Monika and Prof. Ravinder Pal, Chaudhary Devi Lal

University, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Haryana presented the case of the appellant institution on

22.08.2017 and made an oral request that "separate list of faculty for D.P.Ed. and B.P.Ed.,

as approved by Registrar of affiliating body shall be made available shortly."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that list of faculty for D.P.Ed. programme

approved by the authority and signed by Registrar, Ch. Devi Lal University, Sirsa was made

available to Appeal Committee on 23.08.2017 during its 15th Meeting. Appeal Committee

noted that appellant University has selected one Head of Department (shared with B.P.Ed.),

6 Asstt. Professors (on contractual basis), one Librarian (regular) one physio therapist, 3

full time, sports experts, one Dietician and ICT Instructor.

IAND WHEREAS Appeal Committee further noted that appellant University through

its Registrar has also certified that the faculty and other staff selected for appointment is

duly approved by Hon'ble Vice Chancellor. According to para 5.3 of Appendix 6 relating to

Norms and Standards for D.P.Ed. course, the terms & conditions for service of teaching and

non teaching staff shall be as per policy of state government I affiliating body. Since

appellant itself is a University established by the state government. Appeal Committee,decided to remand back the case to NRC for consideration of the list of faculty and staff

submitted by; the appellant. Appellant University is required to submit copy of the list of

faculty approved by Vice Chancellor to NRC within 15 days of the issue of appeal orders.

AND WHEREAS after perusal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit documents are

record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal Committee concluded to

remand back the case to NRC for consideration of the revised list of faculty approved by

Registrar of the appellant University. Appellant University is required to submit copy of the

list of faculty approved by Vice Chancellor to NRC within 15 days of the issue of appeal

orders.

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case of ChaudharyDevi Lal University, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Haryana to the NRC, NCT ,for necessaryaction as indicated above.


1. The Registrar, Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Haryana -125055


3. Regiomal Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1CBuilding, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005, Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government of Haryana,Rajasthan. '

ORDER

RNCTE


HansBhawan,Wing 11,1,BahadurshahZafarMarg,NewDelhi-110 002

Date: 1bl'~",WHEREAS the appeal of Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Bamala Road, Sirsa,

Haryana dated 25/11/2016 is against the Order No. NRC/NCTE/NRCAPP-

10172/257th (Part-3) Meeting/2016/159131 dated 27/09/2016 of the Northern

Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting B.P.Ed. Course on the

grounds that "there is no evidence that the list of the teachers submitted by the

applicant institution has been approved by the Hon'ble Vice-Chancellor of the

University and the same has not been signed by the Registrar of the University. It

has been sent to the NRC by the Dean, Faculty of Education. Moreover, in one list

(signed by the Chairman, Deptt. Of Physical Education, CDLU, Sirsa) Dr. Monika

Verma has been designated as "Professor" whereas in another list she has been

designated as "Associate Professor". Same is the case with respect of Prof.

Ravinder Pal Ahlawat."

AND WHEREAS Sh. Kuldip Kumar, Assistant Registrar and Prof. Monika

Verma, Dean, Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Bamala Road, Sirsa, Haryana

presented the case of the appellant institution on 23/03/2017 and 22.08.2017. In the

appeal and during personal presentation it was submitted that "the University was

already having the sufficient faculty for B.P.Ed. course at the time of filing the reply

to show cause notice. However, the separate lists of faculty members were

attached. Now, the consolidated list of faculty members in the Department of

Physical Education is attached, which is approved by the Vice-Chancellor and

signed by the Registrar of the University. Dr. Monika Verma and Ravinder Pal

Ahlawat, both were Associate Professor."

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee considered the list of faculty submitted by

appellant. The faculty list is approved by the Vice Chancellor and is signed by

Registrar, Ch. Devi Lal University, Sirsa. Appeal Committee observed that Prof.

Ravinder Pal has been designated as Principal and also shown in list of 2 Associate


,Professors. This would mean that still there is a vacancy at the Level of Associate

Professor.

, ;ND' ~EREAS since the appellant is a Department of State University,

Appeal Com:mittee decided to remand back the case to NRC Jaipur for revisiting the

eligibility of ~ppellant institution for conducting B.P.Ed. programme. The appellant isI

required to ~esubmit to NRC Jaipur a consolidated list containing the names andI

particulars bf faculty and Principal duly approved by Vice Chancellor andI ..

authenticat~d by Registrar of the University within 15 days of the issue of AppealI

orders. I

AND .JtvHEREAS after personal of the Memoranda of Appeal, affidavit,

documents~n record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal

Committee !concluded to remand back the case to NRC for reconsidering the

eligibility of appellant institution for conducting B.P.Ed. programme. The appellant isI

required to 'resubmit to NRC Jaipur a consolidated list containing the names andI .

particulars lof faculty and Principal duly approved by Vice Chancellor and

authenticat~d by Registrar of the University within 15 days of the issue of Appeal

orders.

INOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands bac'k the case of

Chaudhary! Devi Lal University, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Haryana to the NRC,NCTE,for necessary action as indicated above.

I!

I1. The ~egistrar, Chaudhary Devi Lal University, Barnala Road, Sirsa,

Haryana - 125055I

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department ofSchodl Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regiohal Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, L1G Building, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005,Rajasthan.

4. The ~ecretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government ofHaryaha, Rajasthan.

I

II

ORDER

R_ ..••..NCTE



Date: 16 t,\Sf r,WHEREAS the appeal of Maulana Azad Institute of Humanities Science and

Technology, Mahmudabad, Sitapur, Lucknow dated 05/12/2016 is against the Order

No. NRC/NCTE/UP-2020/257th (Part-2) Meeting/2016/159633 dated 06/10/2016 of

the Northern Regional Committee, refusing recognition for conducting M.Ed. Course

on the grounds that "the applicant institution has never been granted unconditional

recognition to start M.Ed. course. All reasonable opportunities were provided by the

NRC to the institution to submit the list of the faculty duly approved by the affiliating

University. The applicant institution did not submit the approved list despite getting

several opportunities. In compliance of the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of

India dated 10/09/2013, NRC was duty bound to process this application as per the

provisions of the NCTE Regulations, 2014. As per clause 4.1 of Appendix 5 of the

NCTE Regulations, 2014 the basic unit size for the M.Ed. programme shall be 50.

As per clause 6.1 of appendix 5 of the NCTE Regulations, 2014 for an intake of 50

students the faculty should be Professor - two, Associate Professor - two, Assistant

Professor - six. NCTE Regulations, 2014 do not permit the NRC to reduce the

number of students in a basic unit of M.Ed. course Le. from 50 to 35. Moreover,

there is no provision in the NCTE Regulations, 2014 which empowers the NRC to

allow an institution to admit 35 students and reduce the number of faculty members

accordingly from 10 to 6-7. This is beyond the power of the NRC as per the

provisions of the NCTE Regulations, 2014. The institution is free to admit students

less than 30 but the Regulations do not permit the NRC to allow proportionate

reduction in the faculty. The number of faculty members will have to be the same

Le. 10 (two Professors, two Associate Professors and six Assistant Professors). The

applicant institution has till date not submitted the list of the faculty members, in the

requisite number, duly approved by the competent authority of the affiliating

University. On the basis of the above observations NRC had decided not to grant

recognition to the applicant institution for M.Ed. course."

AND WHEREAS no one from Maulana Azad Institute of Humanities Science

and Technology, Mahmudabad, Sitapur, Lucknow appeared on behalf of the• " II I ,

appellant institution on 24/03/2017 and 29.05.2017. In the appeal memoranda, it

was submitted that "the advertisement for appointment was published and eligible

candidates had submitted their details, but due to change of Regulations, all the

process for granting recognition was withheld as per direction of Hon'ble Apex Court,

and Regulations, 2014 came into being in November, 2014 and by the time the

eligible candidates were appointed they were not interested as selection could not

be finalized., The FOR No. 721039 amounting to Rs. 500000 dated 16/12/2015 and

FOR No. 721040 dated 16/12/2015 amounting to Rs. 700000 of UCO Bank

Mahmudabad as per Regulations 2014 were sent through speed-post-dated

22/12/2015 ,along with original form lA' vide letter dated 22/12/2015. The proof of

composite institution which was issued by the affiliating University has also been

submitted through letter dated 22/12/2015". Sh. Atique Ahmed representative of the

institution m:adean oral presentation of the case on 22.08.2017. Appeal Committee

asked the r~presentation to submit copy of detailed biodata of faculty appointed by

institution in',respect of M.Ed. programme which he submitted on the next day.

AND WHEREAS Appeal Committee noted that appellant institution has

submitted approval letters issued by affiliating body in different years for

appointment of faculty for M.Ed. programme as under:

i) Dr. Prem Chand Yadav, Lecturer M.Ed., Approved on 29.12.2009.

ii) Dr. Sayedda Wasim Fatima, Lecturer M.Ed., Approved on 29.12.2009.

iii) Dr. Ram Nishore Singh, Lecturer M.Ed., Approved on 29.12.2009.

iv) Dr. S'avita Mishra, Reader, Approved on 26.04.2011

v) Dr. Dunga Ram Bhatnagar, Reader, Approved on 11.02.2014

vi) Dr. Jay Kumar Chouhan, Professor, Approved on 19.09.2014.

vii) Narehder Singh, Asstt. Professor, Approved on 29.10.2015.

viii) Ms. Pooja Katiyar, Astt. Professor, Approved on 29.10.2015

ix) Sh. Om Parkash, Asstt. Professor, Approved on 05.08.2017

x) Sh. ~hiv Veer Singh, Asstt. Professor, Approved on 05.08.2017.

AND WHEREAS approval of faculty spread over a span of 8 years may be due

to the reason that application made by appellant institution dates back to year 2006

and issue of LOI somewhere in the year 2009 when unit size of M.Ed. programme

was 35 students. Appeal Committee decided to remand back the case to NRC for

considering the fresh list of faculty approved by the affiliating University. Appellant

institution in also required to submit a consolidated list of faculty alongwith copies of

approval letters received from Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj University, Kanpur from

time to time to NRC, Jaipur within a period of 15 days from the date of issue of appeal

orders.


documents on record and oral arguments advanced during the hearing, Appeal

Committee concluded to remand back the case to NRC for consideration of the

consolidated list of faculty to be submitted by the appellant institution within 15 days

of the issue of appeal orders. "

NOW THEREFORE, the Council hereby remands back the case ofMaulana Azad Institute of Humanities Science and Technology, Mohalla -Sangat Qila Mahmudabad, Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh to the NRC, NCTE, fornecessary action as indicated above.

/(Sanjay Awasthi)Member Secretary

1. The Secretary, Maulana Azad Institute of Humanities Science andTechnology, Mohalla - Sangat Qila Mahmudabad, Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh- 261203

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department ofSchool Education & Literacy, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi.

3. Regional Director, Northern Regional Committee, Fourth Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-II, Lie Building, Bhawani Singh Marg, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur - 302005,Rajasthan.

4. The Secretary, Education (looking after Teacher Education) Government ofUttar Pradesh, Lucknow.

-''hct'e f.no.89-103/2017 appeal/14th...

Documents